WHY
CHOOSE US
CHOOSE US
One of the things you’ll have to prove if you want to become a US citizen is that you have “good moral character,” (GMC) usually for at least a 5-year period immediately preceding your naturalization application. You must continue to show GMC up until you take the Oath of Allegiance.
If your application is denied on the basis of GMC a good immigration attorney can challenge the ruling. But it’s better not to run afoul of GMC issues at all. Here’s what you need to know.
It isn’t at all restricted to the above-mentioned 5-year period. Sometimes that’s as far as USCIS will look, but not always.
For example, in its policy documents about GMC, USCIS mentions they want court disposition documents for any arrest that occurred on or after November 29, 1990 that might have been an aggravated felony. And that they want the information whether you were convicted of any crime or not.
See also: How to Become a U.S. Citizen.
Sometimes you may need to ask for a FBI background check or a clearance letter from locations you’ve lived in during the past five years. Proving you lack any criminal record paves the way to proving GMC.
If you’ve been arrested in the past or have some sort of a spotty record you may still be able to prove GMC. Presenting proof of positive community involvement, bringing in character witnesses, bringing charitable contribution receipts, or showing awards that would tend to indicate good moral character can be really helpful.
Keep in mind there’s no statutory definition that can show whether you do have GMC. There are statutes which can help to show whether you don’t.
Permanent bars to GMC include:
Read the full list of aggravated felonies here. Keep in mind some things which may seem minor, like failure to appear in court, are on the list.
Marijuana is now completely legal in some states, and is legal under limited circumstances in others. As of right now, Pennsylvania law provides access to medical marijuana, but not recreational marijuana.
But USCIS says that working in the cannabis industry, possessing marijuana, and smoking marijuana is a bar to good moral character. Even if it’s being used for medical purposes.
While this policy could change as attitudes and laws do, marijuana is currently still illegal at the federal level. Best to steer clear of it and any other controlled substance while navigating the immigration process.
Since “good moral character” is so fuzzy there’s legal wriggle room to challenge a ruling which says that you lack it. But you’re not going to be able to fight this on your own.
If you’re having trouble navigating the naturalization process due to GMC concerns, or for any other reason, contact Hykel Law today.
It would be nice if things were different, but in general being a member of a same-sex couple means being saddled with worries and complications traditional married couples just don’t face. On this issue, there is both some good news and some bad news.
Legal or not, if you’re an immigrant who has ever been convicted of a crime, you need to pay close attention to the Supreme Court’s recent ruling on immigration enforcement.
Last week, the Supreme Court ruled on Nielsen v. Preap. And it ensures any conviction, even the most minor misdemeanor you can think of, puts immigrants in danger.
The issue at hand was whether the US government could use a criminal conviction to detain immigrants for deportation even long after their prison sentences are served.
Under existing law, immigration officials were to detain the immigrant after he or she served his or her prison time. Because the immigrant was a convicted criminal they could be held without bail, and because deportation is a civil matter, they could be held indefinitely. Going after an immigrant months, or even years, later, wasn’t the norm.
Now, the Supreme Court is essentially handing ICE the ability to hang possible detention over a convicted immigrant’s head until the day he or she dies. No amount of time is too much. 15 years? 20 years? 30? All of the above. And more.
See also: A Wall Built on Policy: How Immigration Policy Changed in 2018.
One of the plaintiffs in this case was Eduardo Vega Padilla. He arrived here as a child and has been a lawful resident of the United States for over 50 years. He’s had children here. And grandchildren. All of the grandchildren are citizens of the United States.
He hasn’t had a repeat offense of the minor drug charges he was convicted of in 1997 and 1999, Twenty years ago and twenty-three years ago, respectively. There was a probation violation. He’d served all his time by 2002.
ICE sat on their right to detain for over 15 years before showing up at his home to arrest him in 2013.
Why would they want to wait so long? Why would they go after someone who has had years to become a productive part of society, or a community? It could be that it’s just an easy way to keep arrest numbers high. More arrests means more funding. It could also be driven by the politics which have brought anti-immigration sentiments to a fever pitch across the nation.
Whatever it is, it’s bad news.
See also: The Basics of Illegal Immigration.
If you are an immigrant who has committed a crime, you need to be on your guard no matter how long ago that crime was. And you need to be prepared.
ICE can detain an immigrant indefinitely, but people with legal counsel tend to fare far better in deportation hearings, and may spend less time waiting on their hearings because they have a strong voice advocating for them.
Be sure to gather all the proof that you’re a legal immigrant if you are, and keep it in a safe place your attorney can get to. You might well need it later.
Remember, Hykel Law is here to help.
A recent report from the ABA calls for a complete overhaul of the immigration court system. Under the ABA’s proposed reforms, Immigration Courts would become Article I courts, making them similar to bankruptcy court in that it would be independent of the Justice Department. This could give them what they need to restructure their services and provide a smoother, more efficient, and more just court.
The Justice Department is refusing to comment.
The ABA has no power to make new laws, but it can make strong recommendations which lawmakers may take into account. Sadly, many of these same recommendations were made in 2010, to no avail.
US Immigration Court is currently beset by a number of problems.
Low Funding
The US government has drastically increased funding for Immigration Law Enforcement, even as they’ve drastically cut funding for Immigration Courts.
This has led to a shortage of judges, which has, in turn, has led to many other problems including delays, backlogs, and unrealistic case loads. For example, some immigrants get as little as seven minutes to see their fate decided, one way or another.
The Washington Examiner says the backlog is up by 300%.
Funding isn’t the only factor. As immigration law enforcement gets more aggressive, the number of cases rises. And judges, well aware of the pressures and the absurdities of the system, are burning out in record numbers. Some news outlets report they’re burning out even faster than doctors and prison wardens.
Pro Se Defendants
Immigration courts are considered civil courts instead of criminal courts, even though ICE detains immigrants until their hearing and wants them deported when the hearing is done. This means there is no automatic right to counsel the way there would be in criminal court.
More than 80% are forced to go in without lawyers, which means they’re pitted against federal prosecutors and are held to the same standard as a fully trained lawyer. As one might imagine, this rarely ends well for the defendants. And as surreal as it is, some of these defendants are babies and toddlers.
If you know you have an upcoming case in Immigration Court one of the wisest things you can do is to get an immigration lawyer on your side so you don’t have to go up against a federal prosecutor alone.
If you or a family member is in trouble with immigration enforcement, call our office for help. We’re extremely experienced in deportation, separation, and detention cases. Hykel Law is ready to help.
An immigration lawyer in Philadelphia is accustom to fielding difficult calls and questions. We are experienced in family separations, detention and deportation cases, complicated asylum matters, and even complex visa applications. However, one question that is growing more frustrating for immigration lawyers across the United States, “why is my case taking so long?”
Recent reports from news outlets, ranging from Forbes to MSNBC have shown a substantial increase in the backlog of immigration cases across the country – and we realize this is impacting every type of case and circumstance. It is important for an immigration lawyer to address the reason for these delays and how our team at Hykel Law can be of assistance to individuals involved in a tough immigration case.
Statistics released by the American Immigration Lawyers Association (AILA) show that the processing time for immigration applications has slowed significantly. Individuals, especially people who aren’t working with an immigration lawyer in Philadelphia or elsewhere, might have their wait for processing by the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) be 46% longer.
The exact wait time can vary by type of application, level of complexity of the case, and whether it is an application for permanent residency, naturalization, an employment visa, or other visa schemes. However, the waits for a USCIS case are noticeable across the board. For example, individuals who are applying for an H-1B, which should be a straightforward process when there is clear documentation from an employer, are still having difficulty going through USCIS in a timely manner.
The processing time for immigration applications and individuals trying to claim asylum is even longer. Over the past few months, an immigration lawyer in Philadelphia has watched the wait time for entering through the southern border grow longer and longer. Many points of entry to the United States are not maintaining a list of individuals waiting for an opportunity to approach the border. The New York Times recently reported in their “The Daily” podcast that people are waiting for months just to hear their name called from this list.
There are several underlying for the delays in immigration cases and applications. First, there are policy changes that have a substantial impact on how and when immigration cases are heard by the USCIS. Even if the official procedure doesn’t change in these courts, the distribution of judicial and executive resources can impact the timing of cases. Everything from scheduling a hearing to arranging an interview at a local consulate could be impacted by policy decisions.
This is why your immigration lawyer in Philadelphia could be an asset. It is necessary to fully understand the procedures of an immigration court and review process by USCIS. Given the delays, a mistake in your work visa application or missing a deadline could push your immigration case to the end of a long list.
Second, the government shutdown in December and January increased the delays in immigration courts and for processing times by USCIS. The federal agencies and departments that handle immigration cases had certain employees furloughed and funds restricted for 35 days. Even where immigration cases were heard, operations weren’t at full capacity. While the partial government shutdown is now over, the impact on immigration matters across the United States is far more extensive.
An immigration lawyer in Philadephia is going to fight for your case. Whether you are experiencing a long wait for your employment visa or concerned over the evidence of your asylum request, an immigration lawyer has the knowledge of processes and procedures to assist with your case. And know, we are fighting for you.
Immigration lawyers throughout the United States have watched processing times increase and information become harder to obtain. In response, we’ve become more forceful advocates for our clients. If you need an immigration lawyer in Philadelphia with the passion and commitment to overcome longer delays in the immigration process, you need Hykel Law.
We handle a wide variety of immigration issues and cases, including immigration waivers, DACA cases, work visas, and asylum. You can reach our team at Hykel Law by calling our office at (215) 246-9400.
At the end of 2018, we had several high-profile news stories break around immigration law in the United States. While several of these stories, from the border wall to expected changes to visa schemes in 2019, highlighted the complexities of current immigration policy, one story stood out from the rest – the status of asylum. Claiming asylum has been an important part of U.S. immigration policy since it’s modern inception in the Refugee Act of 1980, but rarely has the acceptance and policy around asylum been debated this extensively.
As we move into 2019, it is crucial to understand the current law on claiming asylum in the United States, and what could change in the months to come. It is also important to associate these particular immigration laws with events happening on the United States’ southern border. Read on to learn more from our top-rated immigration team in Philadelphia.
The United States has always welcomed immigrants and refugees from around the world. At certain periods in history, we’ve done this better and more effectively than others, but in many ways claiming asylum is part of the national DNA. As far back as 1951, the United States began entering treaties and international agreements that committed the country to accept refugees from various place and circumstances.
Then in 1980, the process of claiming asylum in the United States became an explicit part of federal law. The Refugee Act of 1980, as an amendment to the Immigration and Nationality Act, gave the Attorney General of the United States the power to grant an individual asylum when that person is unable or unwilling to return to his or her home country because of persecution or feared persecution.
However, not all persecution is included in the definition of “refugee” under this 1980 law. It must be persecution on the basis of, “race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.” This remains the definition of refugee status in the United States, but the level of scrutiny applied to an asylum claim has changed drastically.
There are several procedures important to claiming asylum today, in a future blog post we will dive further into what these standards mean and how an immigration lawyer in Philadelphia can help someone claiming asylum. Here, we will focus on the law and more specifically on claiming asylum at the U.S. border or as an undocumented immigrant in the United States.
If an asylum seeker doesn’t have permission to be in the United States, such as a visitor visa or student visa, then the first step is approaching a U.S. immigration agent or Customs and Border Protection officer. Upon claiming asylum, the agent or officer should allow the asylum seeker to start the screening process for asylum. The initial standard for these asylum seekers is the credible fear test.
The individual claiming asylum must demonstrate a credible fear of persecution (or torture) upon returning to his or her home country. Credible fear is assessed in a one-hour interview with the asylum seeker. The standard is defined as a “significant possibility” that, if the asylum seeker’s statements were true, he or she would receive asylum in the United States. Passing this test is not a grant of asylum and it is a much lower bar than the test for eventually receiving asylum.
A bad outcome from a credible fear interview usually results in detainment and deportation. Sadly, there are few opportunities for an asylum seeker to navigate other options or avenues. The expediency of the process, particularly in today’s immigration climate, shows the importance of involving an immigration lawyer early on in your case.
A favorable outcome from a credible fear interview means the asylum seeker’s case becomes part of removal proceedings in an immigration court. A full hearing is conducted and both the government and asylum seeker are expected to present evidence on why asylum is appropriate or not. It can take years for this hearing to occur and the individual claiming asylum is permitted to stay in the United States in the meantime.
The number of asylum seekers refused asylum in the United States is growing. Former Attorney General, Jeff Sessions, even claimed that 80% of all asylum cases aren’t fit for approval. It is true that in 2017, only 20% of the asylum applications submitted, by undocumented individuals in the country and individuals abroad, were approved. Although, it isn’t clear that the remaining 80% were denied on the merits of the asylum seeker’s case.
The attributes of a typical asylum seeker in the United States has changed greatly in the past 10 years. Today, a large number of individuals claiming asylum are coming from Central America and a substantial number of them are women, children, and families. These asylum seekers are traveling thousands of miles to claim asylum at the border, but are now finding a long wait just to make their claim.
Migrants are waiting months, sometimes even longer, on the Mexican side of the border to make their claim for asylum. There is a long list of individuals hoping each and every day to hear their name called just for the opportunity to reach a U.S. border officer or reach the United States at an official point of entry. These long waits don’t include the process of a credible fear interview or asylum case, and the individuals still waiting aren’t counted in the 80% that have their asylum claims denied.
At Hykel Law, we regularly work with individuals wanting citizenship in the United States, people that need a work visa or temporary visitor visas, and people claiming asylum. If you or a loved one needs more information on asylum and the assistance of an immigration lawyer, contact us at (215) 246-9400.
As we start 2019, President Trump will not have the funding for his “wall” on the United States and Mexico border. The President has been vocal on the necessity of a physical wall on the border since his campaign in 2016, but construction has yet to begin. This month, Senate Democrats rejected legislation with the requested $5 billion in funding for the border wall, and President Trump refused to sign any funding bill without those designated funds. Thus, Congress breaks for the New Year in a stalemate.
While the funding and future of the border wall are uncertain, and becoming less likely as the Democrats control the House of Representatives starting on January 3rd, other immigration policy under the Trump Administration took hold in 2018. This was a year of major shifts in immigration policy.
It is illegal for a foreign national to enter the United States without an applicable visa or permanent residency. Section 275 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, or Section 1325 of the U.S. Code, makes it a federal crime to enter or attempt to enter the United States at any place other than an official port of entry, elude or attempt to elude border officials, or use false documentation to enter the United States.
Illegal entry isn’t a new offense under the Trump Administration, nor has the central characteristics of the federal offense changed, but the immigration policy behind this section of the Immigration and Nationality Act changed substantially in 2018.
Practically speaking, illegal entry was always handled through financial and removal proceedings. An undocumented individual is detected, charged a fine for illegal entry, and deported. If there were a claim of asylum or other circumstances, the individual would have additional hearings to determine the validity of these claims. In 2018, the Trump Administration enacted a zero tolerance policy that used the full weight of the illegal entry criminal provision.
As adults were formally charged with the federal crime, minor children were separated from adults and all individuals detained separately. The outrage from this immigration policy was swift. The Administration says that families are no longer separated on the basis of criminal detention for illegal entry, but Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents are still forcefully using criminal charges to detain and deport individuals accused of illegal entry.
The challenges to immigration courts are long-standing and complicated. There has long been the need for some revisions and shifts in how these courts operate and the due process provided to immigrants. But few immigration lawyers envisioned those changes going in the direction of the Trump Administration in 2018.
Under Attorney General Jeff Sessions’ immigration policy of 2018, more immigration court judges were hired and these judges ordered to hear substantially more cases. This move was intended to solve an impressive backlog of 730,000 pending immigration cases. The judges hired tended to share certain traits – a background in law enforcement, focus on former prosecutors, and other governmental experience. As well, the placement of these judges was noticeably at two immigration courts; those courts where hearings were heard by teleconferencing and the cases could, supposedly, be handled even faster.
Further, AG Sessions introduced modifications to the performance reviews of all immigration court judges that linked a judge’s performance to the number of cases heard. Of course, this should increase the number of cases heard each week, month, and year, but likely at the detriment of those before the courts, as due process and other rights before deportation and removal could be overlooked or ignored.
There are roughly 400,000 people living in the United States under Temporary Protected Status (TPS). These individuals come from El Salvador, Honduras, Nepal, Sudan, Yemen, Haiti, and elsewhere. Some people afforded TPS have been in the United States for more than 20 years, but for many of these immigrants, their legal status in the United States is going to change.
In 2018, the Trump Administration announced the end of TPS status for six of the 10 countries currently provided special rights to live in the United States after a natural disaster or violent circumstances. Individuals from Sudan, Haiti, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Nepal, and Honduras will lose TPS between now and 2020.
As the name would suggest, TPS was created and managed as a temporary program for individuals fleeing unlivable circumstances, but to rip away the legal status of nearly 390,000 individuals, some of whom hardly remember lives elsewhere, was met with substantial criticism. In October 2018, blocked the Department of Homeland Security’s cancellation the TPS program, calling it unconstitutional.
The right to work in the United States, even for a limited amount of time, can change the life of an immigrant from India, Argentina, or Hungry. There are 85,000 H-1B visas awarded each year to individuals wanting to work in the United States, which includes 20,000 visas awarded to individuals with masters degrees that are exempt from the cap of 65,000. Most of these visas are awarded to foreign nationals already studying in the United States under the F-1 visa.
Adjustments to the H-1B application and approval process marked a new approach to foreigners employed in the United States and immigration policy around employment visas. First, parts of the executive order to “Buy America, Hire America” has led to a higher standard for scrutinizing and approving H-1B visas. The number of H-1B visa applications denied has increased since this immigration policy change.
Following this adjustment, the Trump Administration announced the end of premium processing for H-1B visas and announced a new preference for H-1B applicants with a master’s degrees or higher that would change the lottery system typically utilized for deciding the H-1B applications that are approved. It should increase the education level and talent pool of individuals approved for an H-1B visa but also cost the government more money to effectuate.
Lastly, a final change to the H-1B visa was proposed, but not finalized, in the fall of 2018. The proposal would once again prevent spouses of H-1B visa holders from working. In 2015, roughly 50,000 spouses gained the right to work under their H-4 visa, provided certain criteria were met, but the Trump Administration is considering removal of this allowance.
While these changes to immigration policy exemplify many of the goals and proposals of the Trump Administration, it is hardly a comprehensive list. The year 2018 was also marked by ICE arrests in courtrooms and hospitals, another increase in the overall number of ICE arrests, and changes to asylum rules and requirements. All in all, the Trump Administration hasn’t successfully erected a physical wall, but the Administration has succeeded in making many aspects of immigration to the United States more difficult.
It should be expected that the complications and uncertainty around U.S. immigration policy will continue into 2019 – making the need for a skilled immigration lawyer necessary.
If you have questions regarding immigration policy, an immigration case, deportation, or U.S. visas, contact our team at Hykel Law. We can schedule a consultation with an experienced, Philadephia lawyer in our office when you call (215) 246-9400.
We look forward to helping you with your immigration case. We have the experience, knowledge and staff to handle your matter swiftly. Reach out today to discuss your needs for representation.